>>15402Saftey switch or not, I'm not sure I'd ever be comfortable with the "security" of sitting on a loaded shotgun.

A better idea would be to weld a firing pin inside the down tube, load it as per >>15401, but the mechanism is just the seat itself pressing on down on the shell's rim--and don't forget to unload it before riding.

This is supposed to be a test firing "of a US navy electromagnetic rail gun that can fire projectiles at 8700km/h — without the aid of gunpowder"

If the cannon doesn't use any gunpowder, and the projectile is not self-propelled, where is all that fire coming from?

My first thought was this must be an ordinary cannon firing an ordinary projectile from an explosive propellant and no one bothered to do any research before publishing the article, as is standard procedure for modern news.

Then again, despite the aerodynamic design of the projectile it must create some friction against the air and the barrel, and in turn heat; the magnetic propulsion system may also generate heat on the projectile through induction. Would a projectile fired from a suffiently powerful railgun create such an explosion when exiting the barrel?

This'll be my first handgun, and it doesn't quite meet my criteria (seems like more of a concealed carry gun), but it's only 200 dollars.

If I were to get the kind of gun that I really want, such as a Springfield XD, it'd cost me at least 500. So for someone with no interest in concealed carry, would a CC gun like the Taurus PT-111 G2 be a good choice?

U.S. developed M-388 Davy Crockett nuclear weapon mounted to a recoilless rifle on a tripod, shown here at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland in March 1961. It used the smallest nuclear warhead ever developed by the United States.